AHMEDABAD: The death of the former President, K.R. Narayanan, may leave an important question unanswered about the then Central Government's role in the communal riots in Gujarat in 2002.

It may also create complications for the former Prime Minister, Atal Behari Vajpayee, in "disproving his guilt" in the handling of the communal riots.

With Mr. Narayanan's death it will now be left to Mr. Vajpayee to "disprove his guilt" and if he does not, it may be construed that the he accepts the allegations levelled by Mr. Narayanan in his letter which continue to remain a subject of controversy before the G.T. Nanavati - K.G. Shah judicial inquiry commission probing into the Godhra train carnage and the post-Godhra communal riots in the State, according to Dr. Mukul Sinha, the advocate for the riot victims.

On the basis of a media statement made by Mr. Narayanan that he had written to the then Prime Minister urging him to intervene in the Gujarat riots and urgently despatch Army to bring the situation under control, Dr. Sinha had filed an application before the commission seeking a copy of the letter and summoning the former President for cross-examination.

`Opportunity lost'

``It was a good opportunity for all concerned to get the issues cleared, but that option was not taken. Now that Mr. Narayanan is beyond any cross-examination, the written document becomes the finality and will be construed as an important evidence," Dr. Sinha said.

He said he was unlikely to press for summoning Mr. Vajpayee to get himself cleared of the allegation against him. "It will now be for Mr. Vajpayee to disprove his guilt," he said.

The Presidential Secretariat had initially declined to part with Mr. Narayanan's letter claiming privilege under Article 74(2) of the Constitution but was not accepted by the commission after Dr. Sinha argued quoting a 1993 judgment of the Supreme Court that the President did not enjoy the privilege under the Article unless it concerned national security or international affairs.

The President's office later sought time to consult the Central Government, which turned down the request on the ground that it would not be in the public interest claiming privilege under Section 123 of the Evidence Act. Dr. Sinha argued that the Centre had no locus standi on the issue under the section which was applicable only to the "head of the department" and the government at the Centre was not "above" the President.

Closed chapter

The commission was yet to take a decision whether to accept the Centre's stand or concede Dr. Sinha's argument and issue an order to the Presidential Secretariat to produce a copy of Mr. Narayanan's letter.

In view of his death now, the commission may prefer to treat the chapter as closed but it will leave a question mark on Mr Vajpayee's role in the riots.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail